Combining Military Leadership With Civilian Management Work Ethics

3rd Brigade, 101st Airborne Division must face reality. “The kill company” scandal has seriously damaged the image of the US Army, which in turn has challenged the trust the Nation places in its armed forces. More concretely, these events highlighted the need for strengthening the Rakkasans’ ethics standards. Soldiers are not warriors; they are ethical warriors, whose identity relies on two inseparable pillars: ethics principles and operational efficiency. The Army core values reflect this ethical identity and the duties that come with it. Understanding that warriors need solid ethical references, the Brigade will demonstrate commitment to the Army values, invest in ethics education, and engage leadership.

For as long as I can remember, I feel as though I have been raised in a military environment. At a very young age my parents taught me to value discipline, manners, and to show and treat people with respect. In addition to these ‘staples’ of my upbringing, excelling in academics and on the athletic fields was where I further grew as a leader and learned to work with others to further distinguish myself from my peers. I knew based on my priorities and values that I was different from others by not only the way I carried myself but how I spoke to my peers and elders and the respect that I commanded. Perhaps those values were aided by both my grandfather’s serving in the military and my uncle attending West Point, a graduate of the class of

Ethics Theory for the Military Professional by Chaplin (COL) Samuel D. Maloney illustrates the complex ethical decision making process. Army Leaders are responsible for professionally, and ethically develop subordinates. Developing unethical subordinates in a zero defect Army is a leadership challenge. Goal-Oriented Aspirations, Rule-Oriented Obligations, and Situation-Oriented Decisions provide leaders an understanding of the ethical decision making process. The first step to Professionally developing subordinates is identifying, and providing input on all subordinate goals. Leaders are obligated to enforce rules and regulations. Understanding subordinate character provides leaders with the information to evaluate a soldier’s integrity. However,

Second, the Army is governed by two related ethos. On the first day of initial training Soldiers are taught the importance of the seven Army values and begin to memorize the Soldier’s Creed. Like doctors and lawyers, “the military is an expert group, charged by its client to conduct work governed by a professional ethic” according to Lieutenant General Robert Caslen. A recent study commissioned by the Army found that 93% of Soldiers share their personal with the one set by the Army. Again, according to Caslen “the Army Values have sustained our institution through some of our most difficult years and will continue to be the foundation of our profession.”

Ethical Dilemmas facing today Army Leaders demands that Soldiers adhere to Army ethical standards at all times. One understanding the whole concept of ethical behavior comes from believing right is right and wrong is wrong or good versus evil. In my opinion, we cannot consider good or bad within the Army profession outside its framework of norm behavior. The Army teaches Soldiers that our forces are protectors to enhance good life throughout the world and whatever we destroy degrades the ability of evil to survive. One of the main issues I have faced during my 28 years is how senior leaders function within the organization.

My leadership philosophy revolves entirely around the Army Values. In every action I take as a leader, I assess whether or not it lines up with the Army Values and the potential impacts. I have had a variety of leadership assignments during my career, all requiring a different leadership approach, spanning from team leader through platoon sergeant. My conflict resolution skills have greatly evolved through my twelve years in the Army, from rudimentary conversations to in depth problem solving. My professional development has had a profound effect on my leadership abilities, from NCOPD’s to mentorship from senior non-commissioned officers (NCO’s).

Conscientious effort is required to develop and prepare Soldiers and Army Civilians to make right decisions and to take attendant actions (The White Paper, 2016). Leaders are in control of refining the quality of character instilled in Soldiers and DA civilians. How does the military as a whole directly guarantee proper character development to the force, you might ask? Or what should effective leaders do to indoctrinate Army values and characteristics within their ranks? They do so by teaching the Army values to every new recruits from day one of basic training as soon as they step off the bus. Collectively with the multitude of attributes given from our leaders through years of experience and ADRP 1/ADP 6-22; these values have established the groundwork for Soldiers to use as basis of what it is to be a person good character. After members absorb these values, their leaders certify devotion. Abiding to these ethics of the Army values embodies cohesion; it challenges the belief and self-confidence crucial to cooperation and mission success.

The essay identifies an ethical dilemma in the United States Army Aviation Branch. It seeks to identify the root cause of the problem using the ethical lenses of rules, outcomes, and virtue provide by the Center for the Army Profession and Ethic. Modern Army Leaders face an ethical dilemma, specifically in low-density Military Occupational Specialties, of completing the mission and enforcing the standards of Army Regulation 600-9. Units deploying or conducting critical training need Soldiers or pilots holding crucial skills. These Soldiers must comply with the body composition standards outlined in the regulation. There are no exceptions. Concrete experience obtained through interviews provided examples of the dilemma. The concrete experiences also provided the leaders action when encountering an ethical dilemma. The root problem produced two courses of action. The courses of action entered the ethical lenses. The impact on the force and recommendation to correct the root cause were given. Leaders must build, implement, and enforce a rigourous Physical Readiness Training program. They must also monitor and participate in the program.

The Army is a way of life; a culture designed to understand, embrace, and demonstrate its understanding. Throughout the entire existence of the Army its culture has been based on elements such as oaths, creeds, the Warrior Ethos and the Army Values. The elements of the Army’s culture are the basis for ethical conduct. Soldiers have been taught to uphold and live by the Army Values but they have not necessarily been taught to remain a professional while upholding these standards. By instilling ethical and moral value into the professional soldier the military is ensuring that all soldiers, even lower level soldiers, are able to make complex and tactical decisions for a strategic effect. If the Army has unethical soldiers they risk failure. Failure due to unethical soldiers can have strategically far reaching implications for the Army, our client nation, and international allies.

Ethics matter in any kind of business or organization, but they are especially significant when it comes to the US Army (Blackburn, 2001). The reason behind this involves the chain of command and the risk to life and limb that are such large parts of military life. When a soldier in the Army has no ethics, he or she can cause trust and respect problems with other members of his or her unit. The US military is a stressful organization for most people involved with it, and people's lives are on the line frequently. Issues like PTSD and other medical problems are commonplace for those who leave the military and must adjust to civilian life, so it is very important that those who are in the Army work with their colleagues and higher-ups to get the help and support they need during and after their service. There is more to ethics in the Army than the problems that military individuals can face, though.

While these three points are extensively discussed and dissected, it is apparent that the key factor that makes us professionals is the ethical standard that we must hold every individual soldier, from the lowest private to the highest general, to. One of the major points that are missing is what happens when the ethical standard is breeched and how it is dealt with.

“Professionalism is not sportsmanship. If you don't succeed, you won't be in your profession for long. In our society, it's not about good or bad. It's about who's on top”. This is a very inspirational quote from Chili Davis, who is a hitting coach for the Chicago Cubs. What he said is important because in todays society if you are not on top in comparison to your peers you will go nowhere in your profession. Military and professional bearing have a huge impact on how someone is viewed in society, having a professional appearance, displaying proper customs and courtesies, and having the proper tack will have you standing out above your peers.

The U.S. Army Leadership Field Manual clearly states that Army leaders and soldiers alike must uphold ethical standards of behavior in war. It also states that "unethical behavior quickly destroys organizational morale and cohesion it undermines the trust and confidence essential to teamwork and mission accomplishment. Consequently doing the right thing forges strong character in individuals and expands to create a culture of trust

The meaning of ethical and moral for me is an ideology standard to analyze the consequence. Also, it could be a regulation to limit a person’s outside behavior and inside thought so that he/she has a guidance to find out the correct direction, and to solve the perplexity. In my opinion and personal experience during the military, I prone to believe the consequentialism. Because I ponder that the assignment of the leadership and stewardship is to provide a valuable advice and organize the orders from higher level. They have to focus on every detail, and concentrate on the variable situation. For what? For achievement and decreasing casualty in the battlefield. The most valuable work in the battlefield is not only winning the war, but also securing the soldiers’ life. Therefore, organizational- level leaders should perform the right thing and modify the errors with ethic in response to the critical and emergence environment. In short, they are enabler and shaper. They follow their personal virtue to do their duty, and obtain the expected

During my time in the military there were many accounts of ethical and unethical decision making. When in uniform we are often forced to make quick decisions to get the job done. Like many organizations we also have our own code of ethics, morals and principles that we follow. The problem with this is that in times of need we often can make decisions that were unethical but got the task completed. We also must factor in the many differing opinions on what is ethical and what is not.